Why Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah

To discuss Jewish topics and issues

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Artur Axmann
Banned
Banned
Posts: 56
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 7:20 pm

Post by Artur Axmann »

[Replying to post 99 by cnorman18]

"By their fruits ye shall know them"

Judaism is hereby validated!

cnorman18

Post by cnorman18 »

[Replying to post 100 by Artur Axmann]

A non sequitur, of which only you know the meaning. Unless you'd care to explain it, of course.

On second thought, don't bother.

User avatar
Willum
Under Probation
Posts: 8524
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
Location: The formerly Great US of A

Re: Why Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah

Post by Willum »

[Replying to post 1 by cnorman18]

I've got to agree. I've been doing research-well such as it is, and came up with the obvious conclusion that Jesus is not the Messiah.

Jesus --> Iesus, or Ie Zeus. Which means "Son of Zeus."

It goes against the idea that Jesus comes from Joshua. But look at the linguistic mangling you need to do to make the transformation. e needs to become o, a needs to become ua, and if you say "ssss," you'll note the only thing in common it has with "sh" is the English convention of the "s," ie it "sh" is not an "s" sound.

And it makes perfect sense along with your idea. Jesus must be a Roman construct, possibly their attempt to take over Judaism with a foreign god, Zeus.

Not to divide the comment, but I have also been toying with the demi-god thing: Isn't that a blasphemy, and to be mundane, wouldn't half of the DNA have to be God's, and so beg many many questions?

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 7502
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: Why Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah

Post by 1213 »

[Replying to post 1 by cnorman18]
The issue was never that there were certain "prophecies" that the Messiah had to "fulfill," as many seem to think; most of the “prophecies� which it is claimed that Jesus fulfilled were never considered “prophecies� by Jews in the first place (the very term has a different meaning in the Jewish religion, which is only occasionally related to “foretelling the future�). The Messiah was never to be identified by “prophecy�; he was to be identified by the PERFORMANCE of certain concrete, real-world actions. To do them was to be the Messiah, and the meaning of the word "Messiah" was "the man who does these things."
That sounds quite contradictory, if there was things that Messiah should do to be recognized as Messiah, then there were prophesy, an idea what Messiah should be, when he comes.
(1) The Messiah was to be a military and/or a political leader, an actual, rightful King who would restore the line of David to the throne of Israel and reign in Jerusalem as the actual, literal earthly monarch of the Jewish nation. (2) He would restore the political independence of the land of Israel and free it from foreign rule. (3) Most importantly, he would institute a reign of perfect peace, justice, liberty and piety that would shortly extend over all the earth -- in THIS world and THIS life; not in a symbolic or “spiritual� way, but in literal, present human history.
Could you tell me, on what basis that was expected?
It was even claimed that Jesus was God incarnate, that a human being was, in fact and truth, God Almighty Himself.
I hope that Jews would get the knowledge that Jesus didn’t claim to be God. He directly said that God is greater than him and that he speaks what God had commanded him to speak.

You heard how I told you, 'I go away, and I come to you.' If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I said 'I am going to my Father;' for the Father is greater than I.
John 14:28
This is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God, and him whom you sent, Jesus Christ.
John 17:3
For I spoke not from myself, but the Father who sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. I know that his commandment is eternal life. The things therefore which I speak, even as the Father has said to me, so I speak."
John 12:49-50
Jews do not believe that God Himself has that power.
I think it is interesting, if the God of Jews is not all powerful.
Third, Jews do not believe that any human can bear the sins of another. That principle is underlined in the Torah over and over again. Each man bears his own sins, and that cannot be changed. Sins are forgiven through prayer, repentance, and “deeds of lovingkindness.� No blood is necessary.
Sorry, if you have already answered, but how you explain the animal sacrifices that were taught in Law of Moses?

User avatar
McCulloch
Site Supporter
Posts: 24068
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
Location: Toronto, ON, CA

Re: Why Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah

Post by McCulloch »

[Replying to post 102 by Willum]

[Replying to post 103 by 1213]

CNorman does not hang out here much anymore. I can contact him on Facebook but I doubt that he will want to get embroiled in this topic at this time.
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 7502
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: Why Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah

Post by 1213 »

McCulloch wrote: CNorman does not hang out here much anymore. I can contact him on Facebook but I doubt that he will want to get embroiled in this topic at this time.
Ok, thanks for telling. Maybe someone else could answer to my questions.

User avatar
Willum
Under Probation
Posts: 8524
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
Location: The formerly Great US of A

Re: Why Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah

Post by Willum »

[Replying to post 102 by Willum]

So I have recently been on a different forum where I am forced to reverse the position.
Jesus must have been the messiah. The OT must have been subject to misinterpretations, etc., due to it's nature.

The NT, having been subject to many modern witnesses and survive a scrutiny the OT can not.
When it comes to accuracy, the OT must defer to the NT, just as a older Journal must make way to a newer in the face of more accurate evidence.

The rationale is very simple:
If the messiah showed up today, based on OT criteria, he would be contested base on interpretation of the criteria, real or not.

So the only way for a messiah to shine through is by demonstrating magic powers, such as those claimed by the NT.

Even this evidence is contested!

Every year Jesus become exponentially more likely to be the messiah.
The logic is this:
If Jews converted to Christianity, and Jesus is messiah, then eternal bliss.
If Jews convert and it is wrong, then they can hardly be blamed for conversion given the time and extraordinary circumstances of Jesus.
If they fail to convert, well, it's been 2000 years since anyone showed a glimmer. At some point a decision must be made. The NT, reviewed and contestable by historians, and not done so. Or the OT, which has no witnesses to any significant event: Moses on a mountain (one man), Noah after the flood (5 men), etc..

Much of the OT was conferred verbally, and verbals can not be relied on within minutes, much less millenia.

Jews were promised a messiah. There is some probability that is was Jesus, even based on the OT. Interpretations can be misinterpreted, poorly scribed, based on hopes and desires of the scribes. etc..
That probability increases with the lack of another viable candidate. That candidate can not be a mere mortal: He would never be accepted, therefor the criteria must be re-examined.

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24690
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm

Re: Why Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah

Post by Goat »

Willum wrote: [Replying to post 102 by Willum]

So I have recently been on a different forum where I am forced to reverse the position.
Jesus must have been the messiah. The OT must have been subject to misinterpretations, etc., due to it's nature.

The NT, having been subject to many modern witnesses and survive a scrutiny the OT can not.
When it comes to accuracy, the OT must defer to the NT, just as a older Journal must make way to a newer in the face of more accurate evidence.

The rationale is very simple:
If the messiah showed up today, based on OT criteria, he would be contested base on interpretation of the criteria, real or not.

So the only way for a messiah to shine through is by demonstrating magic powers, such as those claimed by the NT.

Even this evidence is contested!

Every year Jesus become exponentially more likely to be the messiah.
The logic is this:
If Jews converted to Christianity, and Jesus is messiah, then eternal bliss.
If Jews convert and it is wrong, then they can hardly be blamed for conversion given the time and extraordinary circumstances of Jesus.
If they fail to convert, well, it's been 2000 years since anyone showed a glimmer. At some point a decision must be made. The NT, reviewed and contestable by historians, and not done so. Or the OT, which has no witnesses to any significant event: Moses on a mountain (one man), Noah after the flood (5 men), etc..

Much of the OT was conferred verbally, and verbals can not be relied on within minutes, much less millenia.

Jews were promised a messiah. There is some probability that is was Jesus, even based on the OT. Interpretations can be misinterpreted, poorly scribed, based on hopes and desires of the scribes. etc..
That probability increases with the lack of another viable candidate. That candidate can not be a mere mortal: He would never be accepted, therefor the criteria must be re-examined.

One key peice you are missing is that the definition of the Messiah in Judiasm is different that the Christian interpretation. Sorry, but Christians do not have the
authority to tell Jews what to expect. Also, expecting a MEssiah is not part of the dogma of Judaism. Many Jews see more of a Messianic Age, rather than a star messiah. It is an ideal that all Jews should strive for, rather than a single person.

So, if you want to be Christian, go for it. However, The Jewish faith will continue one.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�

Steven Novella

User avatar
Willum
Under Probation
Posts: 8524
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
Location: The formerly Great US of A

Re: Why Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah

Post by Willum »

[Replying to post 107 by Goat]

Well, yeah, but look at the number of witnesses to the old testament. No established historians, and many stories only have a handful of witnesses who communicated that truth verbally. Even the most conscientious and forthright individual would generate large errors.

You've seen those studies where a message is communicated around a room...

So so you know any good resources for a Jew who wants to accept the infinitely more probably reality that modern scholars circa ~0BC were adequately able to document events?

Or acknowledge that every year that passes makes it exponentially more likely that the savior has already come and gone?

Thanks!

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24690
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm

Re: Why Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah

Post by Goat »

Willum wrote: [Replying to post 107 by Goat]

Well, yeah, but look at the number of witnesses to the old testament. No established historians, and many stories only have a handful of witnesses who communicated that truth verbally. Even the most conscientious and forthright individual would generate large errors.

You've seen those studies where a message is communicated around a room...

So so you know any good resources for a Jew who wants to accept the infinitely more probably reality that modern scholars circa ~0BC were adequately able to document events?

Or acknowledge that every year that passes makes it exponentially more likely that the savior has already come and gone?

Thanks!
What eye witnesses?? I mean, there are a CLAIM for eye witnesses, but ,,well, none of the gospels, or books in the New Testament was actually written by an eye witness.

Not only that, but , well the Jewish faith doesn't care about the claims that the New Testament makes. It just isn't important.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�

Steven Novella

Post Reply